[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
RE: [cdt-dev] JavaCC and the JJ file.
|
Hi!
I agree, but I would still like the jj file used to create the current
parser just because we are productizing first release based on 1.0.1 and
our usability testing is coming back with some issues that will be easy to
fix with the jj in hand. It does seem clear that the current parser is a
derived work of http://www.cobase.cs.ucla.edu/pub/javacc/CPLUSPLUS.jj
unless there is just some strange Jungian collective unconscious thing
going on. I'm just hoping it was pre-compile ported to cdt rather than post
compile ported (ugh!)
I appreciate any pointers to this file and the JavaCC version and make
process used to build it. If it's not there, I'm not quite sure where to
look next.
Thanks!
-Chris
At 05:51 PM 2/27/2003 -0500, Sebastien Marineau wrote:
> What I would like to shoot for is that we merge the
> NewParser1 branch into
> HEAD sometime next month so that we can ensure that we are
> concentrating our
> efforts on the solution going forward. A preference could be
> provided to
> allow the user/developer to choose their parsing framework
> for the outline
> view in order to minimize the risk regarding 1.0.2 quality.
>
> Not that I'm officially committing just yet (as I'm still
> pounding through
> the ANSI C++ grammar as I write this) ... I'm just wondering
> if anyone has
> an opinion about this strategy.
Agree 100%. The sooner we get the new parser itto the head branch,
the sooner we can put miles on in. I also agree with you that
scarce development time will be better spent on the new parser,
as opposed to fixing the old one.
My 0.02$ :-)
Sebastien
>
> JohnC
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Schaefer, Doug [mailto:dschaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 8:35 AM
> To: 'cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx'
> Subject: RE: [cdt-dev] JavaCC and the JJ file.
>
>
> Thanks, Alain,
>
> We'll also take a look at when we can get enough of the new
> parser working
> to generate ICElements as well. If this is soon, it might be
> the better way
> to go.
>
> Doug Schaefer
> Senior Staff Software Engineer
> Rational - the software development company
> Ottawa (Kanata), Ontario, Canada
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alain Magloire [mailto:alain@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: February 25, 2003 8:03 PM
> To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] JavaCC and the JJ file.
>
> >
> > There are quite a few things that the current parser
> doesn't pick up.
> > The one that is bugging me lately is the WINAPI and friends macros
> > that blow
> up
> > the function they are modifying. We need to get something
> in for the
> April
> > delivery (can I call this 1.0.2?) to bring the quality level of the
> outline
> > view a bit higher that what we've got.
> >
> > Alain, since we're not scheduled to release the new parser
> until after
> > April, would you be interested in committing the work you have done
> > with
> the
> > old IBM parser? Or fire a patch at me so that I could
> polish it off
> > and
> get
> > it in? Then, we should also be able to add in the K&R
> param decls as
> > well (hopefully easy...).
>
> I will take a look at it again, seems so long. To get it
> going, I wrote a
> basic C Preprocessor(although evaluation of expression was
> still missing)
> and moved things around to generate the ICElement. Let me
> see, if I can dig
> this out again.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
>
_______________________________________________
cdt-dev mailing list
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev
